Abstract
AbstractIdealizations are omnipresent in science. However, to date, science education research has paid surprisingly little attention to the use of idealizations in fostering students’ model competence and understanding of the nature of science (NOS). The starting point for the theoretical reflection in this paper is that insufficient consideration of idealizations in the science classroom can lead to learning difficulties. The following discussions should help to clarify the terms idealization and model and their relationship to each other. An example is drawn from physics. At least two cases can apply when considering model usage in the classroom. In the first case, to understand an observed phenomenon, a model (as a representation) of the situation to be explained is constructed. At this point, it is necessary to perform idealization. Seemingly, this step is still neglected in much of the science education literature but is well addressed in the philosophy of science. In the second case, existing models to work with are introduced, perhaps alongside a real experimental situation. This approach is called working with models in science education. This paper focuses primarily on the first case. Against the background of model building, a positioning and conceptual approximation of idealizations take place. To organize the idealization process, a framework of several categories of idealization adopted from science philosophy is offered. The framework is intended to stimulate explicit reflection about how models are constructed. The construction of a model by idealization is illustrated through an example from geometrical optics. Finally, the considerations presented are discussed in the context of the literature, and suggested research topics are provided.
Funder
Pädagogische Hochschule Schwäbisch Gmünd
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference67 articles.
1. Akerson, V. L., Hanson, D. L., & Cullen, T. A. (2007). The influence of guided inquiry and explicit instruction on K–6 teachers’ views of nature of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(5), 751–772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9065-4
2. Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the nature of science: Perspectives & resources. Ships Education Press.
3. Burde, J.-P., & Wilhelm, T. (2018). Concept and empirical evaluation of a new curriculum to teach electricity with a focus on voltage. In L. Ding, A. Traxler, & Y. Cao (Eds.). 2017 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings (pp. 68-71). https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2017.pr.012
4. Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What is this thing called science? University of Queensland Press.
5. Coll, R. K., France, B., & Taylor, I. (2005). The role of models/and analogies in science education: Implications from research. International Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000276712
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献